Teach the children well

Attitudes to manufacturing are gradually changing in the UK. It’s something we’re now being told regularly by people in industry. Whether it’s the understanding that the country needs to focus more on making things and less on financial services; the increasing popularity of television programmes about science and technology; or the series of high-profile major engineering projects currently underway in the UK at the moment; there definitely seems to be a feeling that we haven’t seen for quite a long time.

The general public is coming around to the idea that engineering and technology are interesting, valuable things, rather than old-fashioned and dirty, and even politicians seem to be queuing up to say how keen they are to support engineering and innovation in the UK. There are even signs of some joined-up policy thinking in the sector.

And yet we still have a skills gap. It’s not just the UK — we’ve spoken to German, Dutch, French and Scandinavian engineers over the past few months and they’ve mostly told us the same story. There was a lull in engineering recruitment and in the number of students applying for technology courses that lasted several decades, the average age of engineers is going up, and there still aren’t enough new engineers entering the profession to counter the number that are going to be leaving as they reach retirement. Meanwhile, the emerging Asian economies are training engineers as fast as they can.

So what still needs to be done in the UK? Talking to senior engineers at the recent MACH show and in interviews recently, a similar message seems to be coming across. Children have always been keen on the idea of engineering; and over the past decade, parents have come around to the idea that the sector represents a good place for their children to seek employment. The siren call of the City and the world of finance has lost much of its brazen lustre over the last few years. The people that still need to be convinced are the teachers.

It seems that when it comes to advice about careers and how school subjects relate to them, teachers are poorly prepared to guide students into engineering. Frequently we’re told that teachers don’t appreciate what a career in engineering might need; that they don’t understand what engineers do; and they aren’t convinced it’s a worthwhile career choice.

Of course, teachers have enough on their plates with teaching to have to worry overmuch about careers advice. But the answer seems to be fairly obvious: engineering companies have to make more of an attempt to connect with schools. All sorts of possibilities spring to mind, from helping to design curriculums, getting involved with training careers advisors, and sponsoring schools visits. Of course, many companies already get involved in this sort of event, but it needs to become a regular part of every major company and institution’s annual routine, whichever sector they’re involved in and whatever projects they’re currently working on.

Britain has no shortage of interesting, exciting engineering sectors that can attract people’s attention. You can work on racing cars in the most glamorous sport in the world. You can go out of this world, building satellites and space probes. You can build graceful bridges and soaring skyscrapers. You can work around the world. It’s not difficult to make engineering exciting. What’s a bit more challenging is to embed it into the everyday and make sure that tomorrow’s students and educators understand how what they learn day to day relates to the world around them.

It’s the most difficult job in the world, they say. But engineers are used to difficult jobs. Let’s help build people.

There’s no image problem with Engineering, just pay them the better salaries than Doctors, Dentist & Lawyers, after all its the Engineer who develops the “products” that these people use. Without Engineers, how are other profession able to operate. We should also return so called “Water Engineers” to “Plumbers”. The UK has made huge mistakes for decades dressing the wrong people up! and eroding the importance of Engineering and DESIGN! I also find the Engineering Council and Design Council completely USELESS and have failed in what they should be doing and these org’s should definitely be scrapped with immediate effect. They need to be replaced by a new single entity providing extream support from the novice to the professional and more.

When you talk to young people in schools – particularly the bright, ambitious ones – they don’t consider engineering because it’s not seen as a profession in the way that accountancy or law is. When I protest and tell them I’m a professional, a chartered engineer, they say, yes but the man who came to put our Sky dish up/mend the heating etc. was an engineer. I’m not going to do that!
Until we tackle the image, we won’t make progress. Every engineer that can needs to be a STEM Ambassador – interact with yuong people and challenge the outdated image of engineering and engineers. We need to have some pride in our chosen profession and protect it accordingly.

Oh this one is so simple !
The government is obsessed with results “ league table of the so called best schools”
You will find that engineering and technology as been reduced to a side line.
While the academic subjects are promoted.
There are major changes within the school systems that will reduce the time a pupil gets to spend with a real teacher.

This as been going on for a good ten years now so it is of no surprise to me that kids have no interest in engineering.

Where is your supporting evidence for all the things you’re saying about UK engineering in this article? Which politicians are lining up and when? Can you demonstrate that the Public’s perception of engineering is changing? What joined up thinking in the policy sector? What evidence is there for teachers having a lack of appreciation for engineering careers? We all support the cause of engineering here but just because you say these things, doesn’t make them true. Currently it’s just vacuous nonsense.

I agree with most of the article. One thing I would like to add is the lack of status an engineer has in the UK. In Germany, engineers are graduates and enjoy a high professional status on par with scientists and doctors, here in the UK they are mistaken for the chap in his white van fixing your washing machine.

When I arrived to UK, I was rather pleased by fact that kids are going to P1 at age of 4.
But then when I later asked P3 teacher why she still does not teach ‘times tables’, she replied: It is forbidden by
Department of Education, because the level of difficulty can be discouraging to some of the pupils…

Image is a problem… as is lack of information as to a good career path. I did badly in my first year of A-Levels, so then enrolled onto a four year modern apprenticeship with a very large vacuum pump company. I took redundancy as there was no prospects (“we know we have trained you, but you don’t have a degree…”) and it was all off to Korea. I have since completed on Open University degree in Engineering – and I now work as a Sales Engineer. Not through choice particularly, but because my job title has has never been ‘Manufacturing/Project/Design’ Engineer. As soon as people see ‘Sales’ in my CV they assume I have no real engineering experience at all. I am also a married woman of 30 – with no children – so I really do have no hope at all…..

There are several factors contributing to these problems. First we need to address the apathy and the taking for granted of everything engineering based, irrespective of what it is. Second we need children to understand how things are made, developed, and what goes into these processes. Third we need engineering to be salaried accordingly, not the current low salaries as children are taught to chase the money. Engineering is ignored because its low paid.
Four, children need to be taught that everything around them is engineering based, their school tables and chairs, computers, mobile phones, cars which their parents drive, and everything else.

One of the greatest difficulties in our education system is that it is staffed by people who have never left the rarefied world of academia. They went to school, to university/teacher training college, then back into schools to teach. Apart from the odd holiday job, they have never had a real job in industry, and simply have no understanding of the industrial world.
I really feel that we should insist that all new teachers must spend time out between university and their teaching years, working in a job NOT associated with teaching. This would create better rounded teachers with a greater understanding of the real ‘world of work’.

I have pondered this on and off this afternoon, and others have made most of the points that occurred to me. There is just one left:-

Fifty years ago I did “A” levels in Physics, Chemistry, Pure Maths and Applied Maths. There was no “A” level Engineering, and I became an engineer almost by mistake. There was no clearly defined academic route from “O” level onwards.

Step One therefore is to see to it that exam boards set quite difficult “A” level papers in Engineering, such that only the brightest can pass them.

Market forces should then take care of some of the remaining points made above, though some formal and legal prohibition of the use of “Engineer” by the mass media is also needful, as for example, a person cannot be described as a Doctor if he isn’t one. “Technician” is the appropriate term for the person who fixes your washing machine.

2 Reasons mainly.
The first is the Agencies, they drive down wages and put forward people with high degree level passes for jobs that takes skill as well as brain power, to companies that have come to associate a first or higher as being the bottom line acceptance.
Second would be the companies that have the belief that Engineers are disposable and can be got rid of at a moments notice in recessionary times, because they already pay them too much. Bottom line is anyone that highly paid and is not in management is surplus to requirements.

Why would anyone want to either enter or stop in an industry that has these imposed conditions, when they can go and get a highly paid job elsewhere.

I would say the education needs to start at employer level, the trouble with that is that we now have these agency employed retards in the higher levels, that could not spot a skilled person if they tried.

We do have an image problem. Did anyone see the daily telegraph yesterday (Tuesday) where British Gas had a full page and a 1/2 saying get our engineers or something similar. You won’t get an engineer out from BG you might get a technician and most likely a craftsman. When are the Institutions going to do something about the misuse of the term ‘Engineer’. I’m about to ask the Institution of gas Engineers that question.

The idea of protecting the title of engineer is a perennial. I’m not sure whether it would help – I’ll ask a farrier if I get the chance. As far as I know, there’s no such protection of title for people in the financial sector but it hasn’t stopped some of them from being high earners in sought-after positions.

I notice some of us are reacting to British sniffiness about engineering by being sniffy about tradespeople – try doing their job and report back.

Job adverts for engineers that I come across typically demand a very particular set of skills, acquired at no expense to the recruiter, in return for a less than stratospheric salary. Presumably, it’s these recruiters who bleat about a skills shortage.

We’ll know that the lamented skills shortage is real when engineers at the top of their profession are living in posh areas next door to people in the legal, medical and financial sectors, which strangely, seem to have no problem drawing bright youngsters. Have you seen lawyers, doctors and bankers in schools waxing lyrical about their wonderful careers? Maybe so, maybe not.

By the way, it’s the Institution of Gas Engineers and Managers. Lowly tradespeople working with gas have to be registered, have their work inspected every few years, and have to re-qualify every five years. Perhaps that should be introduced for the lofty professions?

Some really terrible ideas here. Taking action to protect the term engineer is elitist (looks very negative to everyone else) and even if it succeeds will not alter the public perception that engineering involves installing, maintaining and repairing stuff. Non-engineers will still call technicians engineers. That won’t stop because of some distant piece of legislation that will receive scant coverage in mainstream press and the vast majority of people will never hear about.

On to the old chestnut that Germany has a better perception of its engineers: this is because Germany actually designs, makes and exports a high volume of a wide range of things rather than chiefly install, maintain and repair them. The perception is different because the reality is different.

I agree with the other commentator that engineering suffers with sign-ups because it isn’t a defined subject at school – like biology, geography or history etc. If it can’t be created as a subject that stands alone (and I’m guessing the fact that it’s a convergence of all the sciences plus maths would deter schools from teaching it alone) then we need to better inform teachers and careers advisors what engineering is and where it can take you and put them in a position to highlight children with strong results in sciences and maths gcses that they have the right ingredients to become engineers and point them in the direction of useful exciting resources on what a varied and fulfilling (and well paid and well travelled) career engineering offers and what a-levels they need to proceed.

Stop trying to turn back the tide, accept where we are and lets all do our bit to help inform the next generation of engineers and importantly their teachers and career advisors.

The worry over the future shortage of Engineers, as the average age increases has been answered very neatly by the government and the pension companies. They have made it inevitable that the likes of Engineers of my age, (47), will still be toiling away at age 80+ being unable to retire, allowing plenty of time for the new recruits to enter the system.

When I was growing up I was surrounded by engineering, local mining activities and in my circle of friends at least 1 in 4 were engineers. At school I was taught metal work, wood work and technology subjects by those who had experiance. With the great decline in the manufacturing centres in the UK there are less and less engineers in society with whom children can relate. Several people have said that teachers lack “industrial” experience and this may be a small contributing factor, but children have less contact with engineering outside school. With fewer parents being from technical careers and less ability play “technically” building swings etc, I feel this is a greater influence on their career choices. Getting more seasoned engineers into schools is one option, but I have to ask if I would place myself into a position of being in a school with the current levels of dicipline and ability for teachers to “teach”. The simple answer is no. There are no quick fixes to this in my 40+ years the decline has been a steady one and history shows decline is always faster than rise. On the plus side my 2 year old daughter loves to “fix” things, has her own toolbox and can already comprehend bolts, batteries and simple block building. If all engineers were able to take at least one “protégé” under there wing the decline in our numbers may be slowed.

Nick Clegg just does not realise why his manufacturing plan will never work – Whitehall is in the way

Nick Clegg’s call for government to give priority to manufacturing is a laudable and an honourable task (9.05.12). But unfortunately it will not work. The reason, government and especially ‘Whitehall’ do not listen to anyone else but themselves. In the Blair years I together with forty of the world’s leading minds that included eight Nobel Laureates advised the DTI on competitiveness, innovation (the most important commodity that we have as a country) and the founding of the NESTA. This worldwide eminent group advised in 1997 and 1998 that the UK should adopt an economic strategy based upon ‘high-tech export driven manufacturing’. Exactly I believe what Mr. Clegg is saying today, but 15 years later. Therefore I can tell Mr. Clegg from this experience that senior civil servants do not listen and just do as they wish to do; just another exercise to them but the future ramifications for the people of the UK is immense. The problem, as it will be today, is that the so-called ‘twenty something wiz-kids’ in Whitehall had not a clue up to assistant director level. They were supposingly the best from Oxford and Cambridge but what they lacked most of all was business experience and the ways of the world. Only theory came out of their heads, for that is all that they had to offer. You may ask why are these assistant directors so important? The answer is that they are the highest level ‘doers’ in Whitehall and it is their analysis and reports that ministers base their decisions ultimately upon. What did the Nobel Laureates and the other leading minds make of all this, they simply said at the end of the two years that they had been simply wasting their time, even after attempting to educate the uneducated. Therefore my advice to Mr. Clegg is to get real advisers advising government and not the Whitehall elite who think that they know best but clearly the last decade and a half has proved that they do not. Only then may he get somewhere, but if he keeps the status quo in Whitehall, it will lead him and thus the country to nowhere and probable ruin again in the long term. Our young deserve a great deal better, for these unseen senior civil servants are constantly dabbling with their futures and where they will no doubt get it so terribly wrong again. Therefore I say to Mr. Clegg, use your intelligence for a change and sort out Whitehall, for that is where a great deal of the nation’s dire problems emanate in reality. Whitehall needs ‘new blood’ like nothing else as it is our future that they will in many ways determine through government economic and business policy.

If we want to entice young people into engineering it is time that Engineers and Manufacturing in general put their money where their mouth is. Last year the UK hosted the World Skills event at the Excel centre. This is the Olympics of manufacturing for young people and features mutiple teams from all countries in skills areas as diverse as confectionery making to robotics and manufacturing challenges. It is a truly massive event and the only time the Excel centre has been used to full capacity – yet for the UK event the involvement of manufacturing companies for support and presence at the show was the worst in the history of World skills.
We bemoan the lack of good people coming through to Engineering but how many of us actually make an effort to visit the local schools and colleges and work with them.
At my employer we began a program with the STEM network and once a month open our doors to local schools to visit with activities set up for the children. Surprise, surprise we are fully booked till October already!
In our experience teachers are fully committed to the advancement of career opportunities for their pupils but WE need to ensure it is Engineering that they feature in there plans.

Have you ever come across a Careers adviser who did anything more than hand out booklets. One of my neighbours was an very academic history teacher AND Careers Master!

In a similar sense, have you ever come across an HR staff member, (used to be called Personnel) who understood the slightest thing about the people they were trying to recruit, many were merely paper pushers.

I work for Babcock in Rosyth who have an exceptional in house designate engineer & graduate training schemes.
It would be good to see more projects like the bloodhound project where kids get to see the real work done by engineers.
Kids also need to shown things that have been achieved by engineers from large structures like the Forth Bridge & Falkirk wheel to more everyday items like the computer mouse.
Schools need to get involved in mini projects like building a model race car where they compete against other schools or designing a bridge not only they would be getting into engineering it would be fun too. More emphasis needs to be put on making engineering challenging & fun to keep kids interested.

As many of the previous comments have said engineers are portrayed as washing machine repairers and the likes we need to show what engineers really are.

To promote engineering in schools it must be shown what engineering does rather than the qualifications needed. Get a project going for schools to compete in making something containing several fields of engineering

I have never been mistaken for the man in the white suit who fixes washing machines, nor have I ever had a big issue with status. When working in schools, a brief explanation of what I do has always been enough. I seem to get sufficient respect as a professional engineer who can incidentally frequently fix washing machines and cars. Remember, respect is always earned, not given as a right.

I wish the wingeing inferiority complex ridden moaners who perpetuate this complete and utter rubbish and talk down our profession would go off and do something else. Engineering can do very well without you.

As a route for getting children interested in engineering how about the ‘green power’ challange? http://www.greenpower.co.uk/
I have been involved as a volunteer at our local school this for 6 years now, its incredible rewarding passing on knowledge and skills. It’s not just about making it, but the design, funding, reporting, analysing, machining, team building, networking, web design / editing……, the list goes on in the same way as an engineering company would.
Our team web page can be found linked below, we try to share all that we have learnt & do with anyone who takes the time to look for it. Have a look, see what you think.http://www.greenpower.beamweb.co.uk/files/RotaryRacer/